Religious governance has consistently constituted a fundamental issue in Muslim political thought. Nevertheless, the manner of articulating the foundations of legitimacy and its requirements is not uniform across different schools. The main objective of this study is to explicate and comparatively examine the foundations of legitimacy and the characteristics of the ruler from the perspectives of Sahib al-Jawahir and Ibn Abidin in order to clarify how the differences in their underlying principles of political legitimacy distinguish the theoretical and practical bases of their thought and to identify points of convergence and divergence between their views. The significance of this research lies in the fact that both scholars are among the most prominent representatives of their respective schools and that their works continue to serve as authoritative references in contemporary studies. The comparative analysis indicates that Sahib al-Jawahir regards authority over governance as a divine office exclusive to prophets and Imams and considers its continuation during the period of occultation legitimate through the jurist’s deputation whereas Ibn Abidin views the caliphate as a legal and social institution realized through allegiance nomination or even force and domination. Despite these differences both scholars emphasize the necessity of governance for the implementation of Islamic rulings and the preservation of social order. This research employs a descriptive analytical method with a comparative approach.